Bill C-18 · 39th Parliament · Stephen Harper
An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (verification of residence)
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedNov. 2, 2007
- Debated in principleNov. 16, 2007
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberDec. 13, 2007
- Passed the second chamberDec. 13, 2007
- Became lawDec. 14, 2007
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Stephen HarperPrime Minister
- David TkachukSenate · Sponsor in the Senate
- Tom Lukiwskidescribes the bill as fixing a problem with common-sense voter ID rules
- Mario Laframboisestates the Bloc supports the principle and explains why the fix was needed
- Larry Bagnellexpresses delight that the bill is passing quickly to protect rural voters
- Pauline PicardStates the Bloc Québécois supports the principle of the bill to fix identification problems from Bill C-31.
- Senator FraserSenate · SenatorThe essence of this bill addresses an important problem.
- Senator TardifSenate · SenatorAgreed with Senator Fraser on the bill's importance.
Who carries this bill
Arrows run from the person responsible to those who answer to them on this bill. The critic leads the Senate’s scrutiny and answers to no one on it.
Where members stand
How it changed on the way
86% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (1,503 words introduced, 1,220 passed).
minor changeintent kept
The bill passed with its core provisions on voter identification and vouching unchanged from introduction. Only front matter, assent details, and the explanatory notes section were removed or updated.
- Explanatory notes detailing existing subsections 161(1) and 169(2) were dropped from the final statute.
Before: “EXPLANATORY NOTES Canada Elections Act Clause 1: New. Clause 2: Existing text of subsection 161(1):”
- Bill status line changed from first reading to royal assent date.
Before: “FIRST READING, NOVEMBER 2, 2007”
After: “ASSENTED TO 14th DECEMBER, 2007”
How precisely it is written
mixedChallenging the law: ModerateDisputing a charge: Moderate
The bill mixes objective rules for when an address on ID is deemed to prove residence with a subjective override for officials. This creates clear steps in most cases but opens room for argument over consistency and doubt.
Open to argument
“reasonable doubts concerning the residence of an elector”
Subjective standard that depends on an official's personal assessment rather than an objective test.“is consistent with information related to the elector that appears on the list of electors”
Undefined terms 'consistent' and 'related' invite prolonged disputes over what matches the list.
Clear-cut
“the elector's residence is deemed to have been proven”
Automatic legal consequence triggered by a clear factual condition without further discretion.“subsections 143(3.1) and (3.2) of the Canada Elections Act, as enacted by section 1 of this Act, are renumbered as subsec”
Exact cross-references and renumbering instructions leave no ambiguity about statutory mechanics.
Discretion. Deputy returning officers, poll clerks, candidates and representatives decide whether reasonable doubts exist and whether to demand an oath.
Challenging the law itself. Vagueness in 'reasonable doubts' and 'consistent' could support a section 3 Charter claim that the rules impair the right to vote in an overbroad or unclear manner.
Disputing a charge under it. An accused could readily argue that the address was consistent or that doubts were not reasonable, given the subjective language and deeming provisions.
Read by a language model from the royal assent text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.
Did it work?
no evaluation found
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.